Leading or swaying in times of crisis?

Authentic and credible leadership is often tested during turbulent, inconsistent, and unpredictable times rather than through stable and steady phases. It is quite easy to portray effective leadership skills, models, and styles during normal circumstances despite the usual fierce competition and daily challenges, but scratching the surface may unravel the other side of the coin, thereby exposing their real core values. What kind of leader are you – the type that embraces crises head-on or is swayed by its winds? Crisis leadership does not categorize which leaders generally succeeded during hardships; rather, it is about those that learnt valuable lessons from various crises experiences and adapted accordingly. This article offers three strategies for leadership experiencing some sort of crisis, mainly through adopting a realistic-optimist attitude, crafting their own contingency paths, and continuously evaluating their plans.

But first, what constitutes a crisis?

According to Veil (2011), a crisis is an event or phase that causes a turning point or core changes to an individual or organization’s planned activities. It is commonly unexpected, disruptive, a single event or multiple occurrences, and could lead to either positive or negative results. A crisis can be attributed to humans or nature (Demiro & Kapucu, 2012) – the latter usually referred to by insurance companies as an “Act of God,” a natural hazard outside human control. Human-caused crises are numerous ranging from technological sabotage, financial recessions, or mergers/acquisitions (Bhaduri, 2019) to as simple as a boy- or girl-friend stepping out of a relationship, thus disrupting the planned activities. Nature-caused crises, also known as “force majeure,” are rarely predictable and are usually outside the control of humans.

Crises could be categorized into three groups: creeping, slow-burning, and sudden crises (Frandsen & Johansen, 2020). Normally, every crisis goes through three generic phases: pre-crisis, crisis, and post-crisis; and typically has a lifecycle consisting of prevention, preparation, response, and revision cycles (Veil, 2011). Other literature identified five stages of a crisis: signal detection, preparation/prevention, contamination/damage limitation, recovery, and learning (Bhaduri, 2019). Regardless of the various groups, phases, cycles, and stages, crises typically cause anxiety and uncertainty to individuals, organizations, and entities at large, and is an undesirable condition most leaders would want to avoid.

The field of “Crisis Management”  

The phrase “Crisis Management” has entered contemporary vocabulary in recent decades, although it has been unconsciously practiced by humanity since early civilizations (Zamoun & Grope, 2016). Hundreds of books and manuals have been written about crisis management and disaster response in the past few years. However, most of these publications are not research-based and are mostly written by consultants and/or practitioners based on their own experiences (Frandsen & Johansen, 2020). In fact, crisis management did not sprout from an academic or research need.

The first important book on crisis management was by Steven Fink (1986) entitled: Crisis Management: Planning for the Inevitable. The author was a practitioner and wrote about his experience serving on a crisis management team. Most crisis-expert authors claim many years of experience and learning curves from real-life crises (Frandsen & Johansen, 2020). Therefore, the impetus behind this discipline was mainly needs-based and not scholarly-driven.

Crisis management is defined as “the sum of activities aimed at minimizing the impact of a crisis” (Boin, Kuipers, & Overdijk, 2013, p. 81). Older definitions include Fink’s (1986): “Crisis management – planning for a crisis, a turning point – is the art of removing the risk and uncertainty to allow you to achieve more control over your own destiny” (p. 15). Simply put, crisis management is summarized as detecting and correcting error (Veil, 2011). More contemporary definitions assume that crisis management deals with risks and threats before, during and after they have occurred (Shayb, 2017).

As communication mediums improved and the concepts supporting “learning organizations” began to emerge and gain traction, crisis-experts started to focus on beneficial learning inferences that could always be associated with a certain crisis. For example, Mitroff (2005) offered seven development lessons that any organization could derive from an unexpected incident; Mitut (2011) emphasized the leader’s need for higher emotional intelligence as a prerequisite for crisis leadership, while Stern (2013) addressed effective learning for enhancing future performance. Recently, literature inclination has focused on specific leadership skills required to navigate through crises and disasters.

“Crisis Leadership” models

According to Demiroz and Kapucu (2012), “leading before, during, and after the crises require different competencies and traits than other types of leadership” (p. 99). Slater (2009) provided a set of leadership behaviors required to overcome a crisis situation, ranging from casting a compelling vision, team building, positive spirit, destination-oriented, and continuous team encouragement. Klann (2003) offered several leadership skills, traits, and perspectives required in crises, such as consistent communication, clarity of vision, caring, role modeling, character, competence, courage, and decisiveness. Boin et al. (2013) attributed leadership success in crisis through making things happen, job well-done, and providing direction and guidance for stakeholders. Mitut (2011) emphasized the following qualities:  managerial competence, promotion of confidence, proper motivation, objective assessment of subordinates’ work results, and communication.

Following are samples of crisis leadership strategies listed chronologically:

• Haley (2009) advised leaders to set the direction, plan and prepare (rehearse) for the future, and develop other leaders.
• Mitut (2011) mentioned Effective Time Management, Professional Development, Delegation, Assertiveness, and Loyalty to the Organization as prerequisite leadership investments in the organization’s human resources.
• Boin et al. (2013) listed the following 10 tasks for effective crisis leadership: Early Recognition, Sensemaking, Making Critical Decisions, Orchestrating Vertical and Horizontal Coordination, Coupling and Decoupling, Meaning Making, Communication, Rendering Accountability, Learning, and Enhancing Resilience.
• Stern (2013) emphasized Organizing and Selecting; Planning (To Improvise); Educating, Training, and Exercising; and Cultivating Vigilance and Protecting Preparedness.
• Wood (2013) simplified the strategies to basic skills, such as doing the right thing, being wise and bold, remaining poised, and celebrating the victory.
• Kaschner (2017) provided four steps in the process: Prepare in peacetime, get familiar with supplements and anticipate failures, KISS (keep it short and simple), and use the crisis log.
• Agnes (2019) also provided fours steps: Identify and understand your risk, develop strong emotional intelligence, proactively find opportunities to consistently build trust, and choose to embed a crisis-ready culture.
• Bhaduri (2019) integrated organizational culture into leadership strategies and styles to include Holistic approach towards crisis preparedness; Building crisis management competencies; Standardizing learning in crisis management; and Engaging stakeholders in the planning process.

Despite the numerous crisis management, disaster response, and leadership skills advices offered by consultants, experts, and practitioners, this article poses the following three leadership strategies as additional pragmatic approaches for tackling crises situations.

1. Embrace a realistic-optimist attitude

During a crisis, it is imperative that the leader maintains an objective balanced outlook. This goes far beyond having a positive attitude during uncertain phases. It requires gathering data, analyzing it, providing alternatives, and transmitting a realistic future stance. An unknown wise person once said: “Leaders absorb chaos, radiate calm, and inspire hope.” The leadership task during a crisis is exactly that:

1. Absorb the chaos brought about by the uncertainties associated with a crisis,
2. Promote a balanced realistic objective attitude, and
3. Transmit a hopeful vision of the future beyond the chaotic present.

In this era, accessing absolute truthful facts versus relative truth is a challenge. We tend to believe the insignificant relative news transmitted by social media and friends or the multiple conspiracy theories over fact- and research-based truths. For example, the speaker of the author’s commencement ceremony at Long Island University on May 17, 1987, Dr. Carl Sagan, the Cornell University astronomer and Pulitzer Prize-winning author, cited researchers that estimated by 1990, one out of every three people we know will be infected with HIV! Such speculative information based on immediate patterns are often untrue and relative.

Embracing a realistic optimistic position particularly during crises is a crucial leadership ability. It requires the aptitude to see beyond the current situations, hence providing prompt decision-making and problem-solving tools (Rogers, 2009a). In general, realistic optimists are people who “construct positive ways to persevere through the storms of life” (Rogers, 2009b, p. 7). Such advocates for progressive forward-looking leaders should not be mistaken with unrealistic optimists. D’Souza (1994) provides the following matrix that summarizes four possible leadership outlooks:

The quest for realistic-optimist leadership is to dismiss negative thoughts or images, focus on the positive aspects of any situation, and choose thoughts and ideas that may change the current status. It is not an invitation to be blindly optimistic without consideration to the facts (Fox, 2012). In summary, “optimistic leaders frame difficulties in a way that is empowering, encouraging, and enabling” (Rogers, 2009b, p. 7) rather than be swayed by rumors, speculations, and unwarranted myths. Research indicates that over 90% of the things we worry about never happen.

2. Adopt your own plan – Don’t copy others

According to Rogers (2009b), the Chinese character for the word “crisis” combines two words: Danger and Opportunity.In every crisis situation, there are imminent dangers hovering over individuals, organizations, and entities; yet based on their own different contexts, such situations could provide unique opportunities for growth and success. Hence, the leader must adopt relevant contingency plan(s) specific to the entity’s context as identified in its internal and external environments, mainly SWOT, PESTLE, Porter’s Five Forces, and Stakeholders’ analyses (Kaschner, 2017).

However, there is the tendency to adopt an existing well-proofed contingency plan from a similar crisis/organization/situation. Several leaders prefer the option of copying a plan already implemented or duplicate another organization or country’s contingency plan. This rarely works. A leader must engage with stakeholders in developing innovative solutions relevant to their own contexts. The contingency plan must have reason and meaning for the specific setting coupled with good knowledge of the individual or organization’s environment (Zamoun & Gorpe, 2018).

Some leaders prefer to play it safe. They tend to wait and see how others will react and under what pretenses. They withdraw from being in the frontlines and simply copy others in their reactive approaches. Don’t! Craft your own path as recited in Robert Frost’s poem The Road Not Taken: “Two roads diverged in a wood, and I – I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.” Stakeholders will remember those leaders that carved their own tracks, not those that copied others’.

3. Review contingency plan(s) constantly

The argument to develop and adopt your own plan(s) should not be confused with the leader’s abilities to continuously review, adapt, and modify their own contingency plan(s). There is always a tendency to do nothing new, lay back depending on the known and tested plans, and adopt a defensive strategy. Several concepts may hinder us from moving away from the familiar, such as denial, lack of capacity to get to where we want to go, stuck in the middle, relationship risks, building arrogance, and scapegoating others (Dotlich, Cairo, & Rhinesmith, 2009). The inclination is to review, review, and continuously review the plans even during the assumed peak of the crisis.

Researchers’ call to avoid irreversible decisions and engage in continuous communications is prevalent (Ansell & Boin, 2019). Effective communications strategies are required to amend and adopt changes in contingency plans (Zamoun & Gorpe, 2018). The main task of crisis leadership is preparing – preparing alternative plans (Plan Z, not just Plan B or C) to address crises such as the Boston Marathon bombings (unlike New York, Madrid, and London – cities with a history of terror attacks) and other natural disasters (Stern, 2013). This should not be ignored, as doing so lies solely on the leaders’ peril.

In every contingency plan, there is a trade-off component; leaders should seek the right information as they make crucial decisions that involve complex trade-offs (Ansell & Boin, 2019). Some examples of trade-offs include safety vs. output, differentiation vs. integration, short- vs. long-term, profitability vs. social responsibility … Each plan involves constant trade-offs balancing one good over another (Dotlich et al., 2009). Leaders should be aware that the constant dynamic reviewing process of contingency plans will affect trade-off criteria and place one good over another good. This obviously involves a sacrifice and balancing act among stakeholders’ needs.

Conclusion

Leading through times of crisis is one of the most challenging tasks for the school of leadership. Many individuals and organizations may claim to possess crisis management, risk assessment, disaster response, and trouble-shooting experiences; however, research indicates that unless leaders have first-hand knowledge in overcoming the dangers associated with crises and focus on opportunities, they tend to maintain the status quo – if not even fall behind. This article reviewed the multitude of practitioner literature pertaining to this discipline, and offered three additional pragmatic leadership strategies to overcome such crises – which is part of everyday life – and to choose the path less traveled by.

References:

Agnes, M. (2019). Becoming Crisis Ready. Public Management (00333611), 101(4), 8.

Ansell, C., & Boin, A. (2019). Taming Deep Uncertainty: The Potential of Pragmatist Principles for Understanding and Improving Strategic Crisis Management. Administration & Society, 51(7), 1079–1112.

Bhaduri, R. M. (2019). Leveraging culture and leadership in crisis management. European Journal of Training & Development, 43(5), 554–569.

Boin, A., Kuipers, S. & Overdijk, W. (2013). Leadership in Times of Crisis: A Framework for Assessment. International Review of Public Administration, 18(1).

Demiroz, F. & Kapucu, N. (2012). The Role of Leadership in Managing Emergencies and Disasters. European Journal of Economic & Political Studies, 5 (1), 91-101.

Dotlich, D., Cairo, P. & Rhinesmith, S. (2009). Leading in Times of Crisis: Navigating Through Complexity, Diversity, and Uncertainty to Save Your Business. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA: USA.

D’Souza, A. (1994). Developing the Leader Within You: Strategies for Effective Leadership. Haggai Institute. Atlanta, GA: USA.

Fink, S. (1986). Crisis Management: Planning for the Inevitable. American Management Association, USA.

Fox, T. (2012). Realistic optimism. Executive Leadership, 27(3), 8.

Frandsen, F., & Johansen, W. (2020). Advice on Communicating During Crisis: A Study of Popular Crisis Management Books. International Journal of Business Communication, 57(2), 260–276.

Haley, D. (2009). Leading in a Crisis. Personal Excellence, 14(6), 14.

Kaschner, H. (2017). Effective crisis decision-making. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning, 11(1), 27–36.

Klann, G. (2003). Chapter 2: What Is Crisis Leadership? In Crisis Leadership (pp. 11–26). Center for Creative Leadership.

Mitut, I. (2011). The Role of Leadership in the Management of Crisis Situations. Romanian Economic and Business Review, 6(3), 20–33.

Rogers, E. M. (2009a). Optimism or Positivity. Leadership Excellence, 26(5), 19.

Rogers, E. M. (2009b). Realistic Optimism. Personal Excellence, 14(2), 7.

Shayb, H. A. (2017). Crisis Management Versus Risk Management – a Practical Approach. Internal Auditing & Risk Management, 12(2), 28–35.

Slater, S. (2009). When the tide goes out: Leading people in the difficult times. Journal of the Quality Assurance Institute, 32(2), 15-15.

Stern, E. (2013). Preparing: The Sixth Task of Crisis Leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7(3), 51–56.

Veil, S. R. (2011). Mindful Learning in Crisis Management. Journal of Business Communication, 48(2), 116–147.

Wood, R. (2013). Crisis Leadership. Defense AT&L, 42(4), 6–9.

Zamoun, K. & Gorpe, T.S. (2018). Crisis Management: A Historical and Conceptual Approach for a Better Understanding of Today’s Crises. Intechopen.